Appropriate Use Criteria for Osteoporotic Compression Fractures.

Abstract

Background context: There is a lack of consensus regarding optimal indications for treatment of patients with osteoporotic vertebral fractures. An opportunity exists to improve outcomes if these indications can be clarified.

Purpose: The purpose of the North American Spine Society (NASS) Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) was to determine the appropriate (i.e. reasonable) multidisciplinary treatment recommendations for patients with osteoporotic vertebral fractures across a spectrum of more common clinical scenarios.

Study design: A Modified Delphi process.

Patient sample: Modified consensus based guideline OUTCOME MEASURES: Final rating for treatment recommendations as either "Appropriate", "Uncertain", or "Rarely Appropriate" based on the median final rating among the raters.

Methods: The methodology was based on the AUC development process established by the Research AND Development (RAND) Corporation. The topic of osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture was selected by NASS for its Clinical Practice Guideline development (CPG). In conjunction, the AUC committee determined key modifiers and adapted the standard definitions developed by the CPG with minimal modifications. A literature search and evidence analysis performed by the CPG were reviewed by the AUC work group. A separate multidisciplinary rating group was assembled. Clinical scenarios were generated based on a matrix of the modifiers, to rate the appropriateness of medical management, cement augmentation, or surgery. Based on the literature, provider experience, and group discussion, each scenario was scored on a nine-point scale on two separate occasions: once without discussion and again following discussion of the initial responses. The median rating for each scenario and level of agreement was then used to determine final indications as rarely appropriate with agreement (1 - 3), uncertain or disagreement (4-6), or appropriate with agreement (7-9). Consensus was not mandatory.

Results: Medical management was appropriate across all scenarios. Cement augmentation was rarely appropriate in 60% of scenarios and uncertain or disagreement in 35% of scenarios. In the 5% of scenarios rated as appropriate with agreement for cement augmentation, high pain scores, acute duration, and simple fracture pattern were always present. Surgery was appropriate in 35% of scenarios and strongly influenced by instability and stenosis with neurological findings. Surgery was rarely appropriate in 18%, and uncertain or disagreement in 47% of scenarios.

Conclusions: Multidisciplinary appropriate treatment criteria for osteoporotic vertebral fractures were generated based on the RAND methodology. This document provides comprehensive evidence-based recommendations for evaluation and treatment of osteoporotic vertebral fractures. The document in its entirety will be found on the NASS website (https://www.spine.org/Research-Clinical-Care/Quality-Improvement/Appropriate-Use-Criteria).